Posts
Donald Trump’s war on the environment
1 day ago
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Army Alledged Murderer ( "Alleged" because my Legal Dept. requires it!)
Do you have one bit of doubt that the army pushed alleged murderer Maj. Nidal Hasan along because of a fear of a claim of racial/religious discrimination? As the reports come it it appears that incompetence and fear on the part of his superiors and supervisors protected Hasan. See the latest report.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Rating Obama- Part 3 International Relations
The one word that could sum up the first year of the Obama administration is "naive". This administration believes that rational thinking and professorial reserve are effective traits in dealing with the entire world. They are not. Sure, Western Europe can fall in love with him, but their support, if it is present to any degree, is minimal and ineffective. When it comes to dealing with our enemies, specifically radical Islamists, rational 21st Century cool will not prevail.
Let's briefly look at some areas.
Afghanistan:
The Obama administration to add 30,000 troops over the next year is a half baked measure in light of the President's announced plan to begin withdrawing them in 2011 and 2012. First, the president has cut off at the knees his own on scene commander, Gen. McChrystal, who asked for 40,000 troops. Second, he has given the Taliban and al Queda a timetable for them to resume their operations.
Counterinsurgency operations are long term commitments. Obama has demonstrated that he is not willing to make this commitment. For his failure to define an effective strategic position , Obama earns an "F". For their failure to effectively engage the enemy in their assigned areas of operation, our allies earn an "F".
Iran:
Obama has offered a open hand of friendship to the Iranian administration. His efforts have garnered repeated slaps in the face from the Iranians. In dealing with Iran's clear efforts to develop nuclear weapons, Obama is hampered by European weakness and the outright antipathy of both Russia and China. As a result of the positions taken by the latter two countries, it will be impossible to implement effective sanctions. Absent either covert mechanisms to destroy or disrupt the Iranian effort or a massive bombing campaign to destroy nuclear facilities, for the first time nuclear weapons will be in the hands of religious radicals with a 7th century mindset. For his failure to engage the issue effectively and vigorously from the beginning of his administration, Obama earns the grade of "F".
Israel-Palestine:
"Naive". It is the word that best fits the Obama approach to this area of the middle east. Obama has failed to appreciate several realities. Israel is under real and significant threats from entities sworn to her destruction-from the North in the form of Iran back Hezbollah; from the East, with a corrupt and lawless Palestinian Authority and Iran; and from the South, from Hamas controlled Gaza. At this point, Obama might have learned that the Palestinians believe that they can gain everything that they want by continuing to say "no" to any overture from Israel. The initial American position of trying to be an honest broker can not achieve any tangible improvements when one of the parties on the other side believes that it can accomplish more by refusing to negotiate. It is the tactic of the souk. And it can be very effective for them. For its part, Israel fails to play its strongest had, by making life for the Palestinians on the West bank easier, richer and more successful at a faster rate than it has been moving in this direction. There are intractable issues. Israel will never give up Jerusalem and failure of Western powers to understand that the holiest location for Israel-the Western Wall- lies in what would otherwise be Arab Jerusalem. Another non-starter is the idea of making Jerusalem an " international city". Nowhere has this idea worked. Nor will Israel allow the Palestinian refugee families to return whence they came.
Overall, I an tempted to give the Obama administration an "F" , but with the hope that a great degree of learning has taken place this year, I'll raise the grade to "D".
Russia:
After hearing the yapping from Russia, Obama decided to scrap a defensive nuclear missile program that would have placed radars in the Czech Republic and Anti-missile weapons in Poland. In return for undermining our allies, who took undertook a great degree of risk in allowing these facilities to be placed in their respective countries, the Obama administration received nothing in return from Russia. Since these defensive weapons were designed to deter an Iranian threat, one might reasonably expect that the Obama administration would tie the removal o the weapons with Russian support for strong measure to prevent an Iranian nuclear weapon. However, the Obama administration failed in achieving that simple goal. It can be fairly said that the administration surrendered a bargaining chip without securing anything in return. Grade "F".
Let's briefly look at some areas.
Afghanistan:
The Obama administration to add 30,000 troops over the next year is a half baked measure in light of the President's announced plan to begin withdrawing them in 2011 and 2012. First, the president has cut off at the knees his own on scene commander, Gen. McChrystal, who asked for 40,000 troops. Second, he has given the Taliban and al Queda a timetable for them to resume their operations.
Counterinsurgency operations are long term commitments. Obama has demonstrated that he is not willing to make this commitment. For his failure to define an effective strategic position , Obama earns an "F". For their failure to effectively engage the enemy in their assigned areas of operation, our allies earn an "F".
Iran:
Obama has offered a open hand of friendship to the Iranian administration. His efforts have garnered repeated slaps in the face from the Iranians. In dealing with Iran's clear efforts to develop nuclear weapons, Obama is hampered by European weakness and the outright antipathy of both Russia and China. As a result of the positions taken by the latter two countries, it will be impossible to implement effective sanctions. Absent either covert mechanisms to destroy or disrupt the Iranian effort or a massive bombing campaign to destroy nuclear facilities, for the first time nuclear weapons will be in the hands of religious radicals with a 7th century mindset. For his failure to engage the issue effectively and vigorously from the beginning of his administration, Obama earns the grade of "F".
Israel-Palestine:
"Naive". It is the word that best fits the Obama approach to this area of the middle east. Obama has failed to appreciate several realities. Israel is under real and significant threats from entities sworn to her destruction-from the North in the form of Iran back Hezbollah; from the East, with a corrupt and lawless Palestinian Authority and Iran; and from the South, from Hamas controlled Gaza. At this point, Obama might have learned that the Palestinians believe that they can gain everything that they want by continuing to say "no" to any overture from Israel. The initial American position of trying to be an honest broker can not achieve any tangible improvements when one of the parties on the other side believes that it can accomplish more by refusing to negotiate. It is the tactic of the souk. And it can be very effective for them. For its part, Israel fails to play its strongest had, by making life for the Palestinians on the West bank easier, richer and more successful at a faster rate than it has been moving in this direction. There are intractable issues. Israel will never give up Jerusalem and failure of Western powers to understand that the holiest location for Israel-the Western Wall- lies in what would otherwise be Arab Jerusalem. Another non-starter is the idea of making Jerusalem an " international city". Nowhere has this idea worked. Nor will Israel allow the Palestinian refugee families to return whence they came.
Overall, I an tempted to give the Obama administration an "F" , but with the hope that a great degree of learning has taken place this year, I'll raise the grade to "D".
Russia:
After hearing the yapping from Russia, Obama decided to scrap a defensive nuclear missile program that would have placed radars in the Czech Republic and Anti-missile weapons in Poland. In return for undermining our allies, who took undertook a great degree of risk in allowing these facilities to be placed in their respective countries, the Obama administration received nothing in return from Russia. Since these defensive weapons were designed to deter an Iranian threat, one might reasonably expect that the Obama administration would tie the removal o the weapons with Russian support for strong measure to prevent an Iranian nuclear weapon. However, the Obama administration failed in achieving that simple goal. It can be fairly said that the administration surrendered a bargaining chip without securing anything in return. Grade "F".
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Rating Obama- Part 2- Economics/ Domestic
In late 2008, the United States economy, and by extension , the world economy, was at the brink of the abyss. The risky business practices of banks and brokerages had caused a collapse in the credit markets and bank failures were at their highest rates since the Great Depression. Home mortgages were unpaid at near record rates. Foreclosures and bankruptcies exploded. The famous Lehman Brothers brokerage house failed. AIG Insurance failed. Fear flooded Wall Street as the media broadcast news of an imminent Great Depression II and the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost almost half its value from its high point. In the last days of the Bush administration, the Republican President was forced to step in and inject money into the banks and brokerage houses to keep the nation solvent. The Great Bailout of 2008 had begun.
When Barack Obama took office, national economic failure was still an option. He quickly put together an economic stimulus package designed to get money flowing into the economy in the form of public works projects. Obama's supporters on the left felt that the almost one trillion dollar stimulus package was too little to do the job of turning the economy around. His opponents on the right felt that the stimulus would burden future generations with crippling debt. The future may prove that both sides were correct.
Along with the failures of the economic markets, the nation's automobile manufacturers were also near collapse. Decades of poor business practices and their collective failure to bring to market the products that the public wanted, and which needs were satisfied by Japanese and European manufacturers, all resulted in a downward spiral of sales and earnings. General Motors, the nation's largest car maker had run out of cash. Chrysler had nothing left in its tank. Ford was still solvent, but its products had not been selling either. These factors,combined with the lack of credit from the 2008 meltdown, meant that cars weren't moving off lots, manufacturing ceased, and the American car industry, along with its plethora of independent suppliers, was about to die, and if they did millions would be unemployed.
Against a background of Republican charges of Socialism, the Obama administration forced bankruptcy on General Motors and a subsequent sale of Chrysler to Italy's FIAT Corporation. In return for these measures, as well as product restructuring plans and union contract givebacks, the administration pumped needed cash into both companies to keep them solvent. Ford alone eschewed government intervention as the corporate leaders felt that they had enough cash on hand to weather the storm.
Today, the economy pulled back from the brink. Economists as talking about "green shoots of recovery". Following a period of severe layoffs, companies are stating to talk about hiring. A small glimmer of hope is on the horizon.
So how does one grade President Obama's performance? Within a short time after taking office, he had to have his team in place and form appropriate responses to the banking failures, the freezing of credit markets, job losses, and the potential failure of the entire automobile industry. Mr. Obama never set up false hopes of rapid recovery. He spoke calmly and honestly about the problems. Despite taking fire from both the left and the right, the President steered a course that was admirable in both its effectiveness and in its restraint, trying to do what had to be done, neither too little money nor too much government intervention.
In the category of "Economics/Domestic" President Obama earns a grade of "A".
When Barack Obama took office, national economic failure was still an option. He quickly put together an economic stimulus package designed to get money flowing into the economy in the form of public works projects. Obama's supporters on the left felt that the almost one trillion dollar stimulus package was too little to do the job of turning the economy around. His opponents on the right felt that the stimulus would burden future generations with crippling debt. The future may prove that both sides were correct.
Along with the failures of the economic markets, the nation's automobile manufacturers were also near collapse. Decades of poor business practices and their collective failure to bring to market the products that the public wanted, and which needs were satisfied by Japanese and European manufacturers, all resulted in a downward spiral of sales and earnings. General Motors, the nation's largest car maker had run out of cash. Chrysler had nothing left in its tank. Ford was still solvent, but its products had not been selling either. These factors,combined with the lack of credit from the 2008 meltdown, meant that cars weren't moving off lots, manufacturing ceased, and the American car industry, along with its plethora of independent suppliers, was about to die, and if they did millions would be unemployed.
Against a background of Republican charges of Socialism, the Obama administration forced bankruptcy on General Motors and a subsequent sale of Chrysler to Italy's FIAT Corporation. In return for these measures, as well as product restructuring plans and union contract givebacks, the administration pumped needed cash into both companies to keep them solvent. Ford alone eschewed government intervention as the corporate leaders felt that they had enough cash on hand to weather the storm.
Today, the economy pulled back from the brink. Economists as talking about "green shoots of recovery". Following a period of severe layoffs, companies are stating to talk about hiring. A small glimmer of hope is on the horizon.
So how does one grade President Obama's performance? Within a short time after taking office, he had to have his team in place and form appropriate responses to the banking failures, the freezing of credit markets, job losses, and the potential failure of the entire automobile industry. Mr. Obama never set up false hopes of rapid recovery. He spoke calmly and honestly about the problems. Despite taking fire from both the left and the right, the President steered a course that was admirable in both its effectiveness and in its restraint, trying to do what had to be done, neither too little money nor too much government intervention.
In the category of "Economics/Domestic" President Obama earns a grade of "A".
Rating Obama- Part 1- The Line Up
Technically, it is just under one year since Barack Obama took the historic oath of office on the west steps of the Capital, but it is time to hand out grades on his performance to date.
It is important to recognize that although his party holds majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, these majorities are far slimmer than they appear. In their efforts to take control of both houses, the Democrats enacted a big-tent strategy which allowed them to include a wide range of political philosophies under the Democrat label. As a result of this strategy, the Senate Democrats include more conservative members, such as Connecticut Independent Joseph Lieberman and Nebraska's Ben Nelson, along with left wing Independent Bernard Sanders of Vermont, and noted liberals Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein of California. The house includes a significant conservative democratic faction, the Blue Dog Coalition to go along with the usual liberal line up.
Neither the Senate nor the House contain a philosophically monolithic Democratic majority, willing to march in lock-step where ever the President points. As a result of these political realities, President Obama must satisfy to some degree the demands of these varied factions. Whether by his own political temperament, or as the result of political calculation, Barack Obama's Presidency has been marked by a more moderate approach than that which many of his liberal supporters hoped for and his conservative detractors feared. The result is that his most liberal supporters are currently disappointed on a number of issues and already are talking of betrayal, while his conservative opponents will never be satisfied with anything he does.
In several follow-up postings, I'll take a look at the President's record on a variety of issues, such as the economy, environment, terrorism, war, relations with other nations, and the middle east.
It is important to recognize that although his party holds majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, these majorities are far slimmer than they appear. In their efforts to take control of both houses, the Democrats enacted a big-tent strategy which allowed them to include a wide range of political philosophies under the Democrat label. As a result of this strategy, the Senate Democrats include more conservative members, such as Connecticut Independent Joseph Lieberman and Nebraska's Ben Nelson, along with left wing Independent Bernard Sanders of Vermont, and noted liberals Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein of California. The house includes a significant conservative democratic faction, the Blue Dog Coalition to go along with the usual liberal line up.
Neither the Senate nor the House contain a philosophically monolithic Democratic majority, willing to march in lock-step where ever the President points. As a result of these political realities, President Obama must satisfy to some degree the demands of these varied factions. Whether by his own political temperament, or as the result of political calculation, Barack Obama's Presidency has been marked by a more moderate approach than that which many of his liberal supporters hoped for and his conservative detractors feared. The result is that his most liberal supporters are currently disappointed on a number of issues and already are talking of betrayal, while his conservative opponents will never be satisfied with anything he does.
In several follow-up postings, I'll take a look at the President's record on a variety of issues, such as the economy, environment, terrorism, war, relations with other nations, and the middle east.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Turning Tide? Fighting Terrorism In Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen
Two news articles today make me wonder if perhaps the Taliban have reached their high water mark and now are about to ebb back into the caves and crevices of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The New York Times reports that some Afghanis within their own country are starting to pick up arms against the religious extremists. Some "experts" claim that the formation of local militias weakens the central government. But with a central government that is not trusted by the citizenry, local action is an effective means of combating the Taliban push. Effective counter-insurgency requires the active cooperation and action from the locals in order to defeat the Taliban. Except for the British action in Malaysia against insurgent forces there, a 15 year battle which resulted in the uprooting and relocation of a major portion of the population, regular army actions against insurgents have all failed.
Taliban cruelty is becoming more well known then their supposed piety. And perhaps even in war-weary Afghanistan, there may be a limit to how much oppression people will tolerate.
Further evidence that Afghanis, may, just may, be finding a new path away from corrupt government comes in this NYTIMES story from Kabul:
From the eastern side of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border comes this story about Pakistani reaction to the recent car-bombing that killed almost 100 innocents. Said one Pakistani elder who is part of a still forming anti-Taliban council:
"The people are in severe grief and fear — it is a demoralizing thing," said Raham Dil Khan, a rifle-toting, 70-something member of the tribal council. "We want the government to provide security, but one thing is very clear: The committee will stand against every type of terrorism and despite this great loss we will continue our work."
If sufficient forces form to squeeze the Taliban simultaneously from the Afghan side of the border and also from the Pakistan side of the border, the Taliban will be hard-pressed to wage effective warfare in either country. And that which makes life difficult for the Taliban also makes life difficult for Osama Bin Laden's Al-Kaida, which has been sheltered by the Taliban for decades.
The question arises: Can NATO forces provide sufficient backing for the local anti-Taliban Afghanis without raising their own profile to the degree that they are considered foreign invaders, and thus targets of nationalistic, or tribal, Afghanis?
A second question arises. If the military and political pressures in the Afghanistan-Pakistan make life uncomfortable for Al-Kaida. Where will that group go next? Al-Kaida is an idea, it is a stateless, amorphous entity that thrives without traditional governmental forms and structures. It moves like quicksilver. Push it in one direction and it will flow in another. It needs neither a capital city nor a standing army. Offshoots can and have developed where they did not exist previously such as Iraq and Yemen. It thrives wherever Islamic governments are corrupt or weak or both. It thrives where there is a disaffected Muslim populations, such as the Philippines.
It is clear that Al-Kaida must be attacked on all fronts simultaneously to prevent it from flowing and reforming where fertile environments exist: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, The Philippines. Can the United States, local governments, and whatever Western allies we can muster, commit the forces, the funds, and more important, the political will to fight what will be a delicate and decades long war against terrorism?
The New York Times reports that some Afghanis within their own country are starting to pick up arms against the religious extremists. Some "experts" claim that the formation of local militias weakens the central government. But with a central government that is not trusted by the citizenry, local action is an effective means of combating the Taliban push. Effective counter-insurgency requires the active cooperation and action from the locals in order to defeat the Taliban. Except for the British action in Malaysia against insurgent forces there, a 15 year battle which resulted in the uprooting and relocation of a major portion of the population, regular army actions against insurgents have all failed.
Taliban cruelty is becoming more well known then their supposed piety. And perhaps even in war-weary Afghanistan, there may be a limit to how much oppression people will tolerate.
Further evidence that Afghanis, may, just may, be finding a new path away from corrupt government comes in this NYTIMES story from Kabul:
KABUL, Afghanistan — In a clear signal to President Hamid Karzai that he cannot count on Parliament for support, lawmakers resoundingly rejected most of his nominees for cabinet posts and expressed discontent with the candidates’ competence.
From the eastern side of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border comes this story about Pakistani reaction to the recent car-bombing that killed almost 100 innocents. Said one Pakistani elder who is part of a still forming anti-Taliban council:
"The people are in severe grief and fear — it is a demoralizing thing," said Raham Dil Khan, a rifle-toting, 70-something member of the tribal council. "We want the government to provide security, but one thing is very clear: The committee will stand against every type of terrorism and despite this great loss we will continue our work."
If sufficient forces form to squeeze the Taliban simultaneously from the Afghan side of the border and also from the Pakistan side of the border, the Taliban will be hard-pressed to wage effective warfare in either country. And that which makes life difficult for the Taliban also makes life difficult for Osama Bin Laden's Al-Kaida, which has been sheltered by the Taliban for decades.
The question arises: Can NATO forces provide sufficient backing for the local anti-Taliban Afghanis without raising their own profile to the degree that they are considered foreign invaders, and thus targets of nationalistic, or tribal, Afghanis?
A second question arises. If the military and political pressures in the Afghanistan-Pakistan make life uncomfortable for Al-Kaida. Where will that group go next? Al-Kaida is an idea, it is a stateless, amorphous entity that thrives without traditional governmental forms and structures. It moves like quicksilver. Push it in one direction and it will flow in another. It needs neither a capital city nor a standing army. Offshoots can and have developed where they did not exist previously such as Iraq and Yemen. It thrives wherever Islamic governments are corrupt or weak or both. It thrives where there is a disaffected Muslim populations, such as the Philippines.
It is clear that Al-Kaida must be attacked on all fronts simultaneously to prevent it from flowing and reforming where fertile environments exist: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, The Philippines. Can the United States, local governments, and whatever Western allies we can muster, commit the forces, the funds, and more important, the political will to fight what will be a delicate and decades long war against terrorism?
Food For Thought- How One Cup of Coffee Impacts the World and a Person
This morning I ground some Colombian coffee beans and made some fresh coffee. It was absolutely delicious and I savored every drop.
For almost all of us living in the United States, we live in a land of incomprehensible abundance when it comes to food. We have the luxury of dreaming up gourmet meals and then buying them, whether to cook them ourselves or to have someone else do the heavy work and then serving it to us for a fee.
A simple cup of coffee is not so simple. Coffee is grown in many places except in the continental United States. It must be planted, harvested, graded, shipped, roasted, ground, and then perked, dripped or French pressed. Whether you perform the last few steps at home or delegate the task to the local deli or Starbucks, there is a lot going on in that cup. It took a lot of work.
Our wealth allows us to become, "Foodies", "Gourmets", "Oenophiles". We can cook four different cuisines, serve eight course meals, and discourse intelligently on chablis and chardonnays, cabernets and syrahs.
So as we start the new year, let us take a moment to contemplate our abundance of food and the wealth which makes this all possible. We have the luxury to decide what to eat or what not to eat. We do not have to wonder which dumpster will provide our next meal or which puddle will supply our next drink.
A moment or two of thanks or appreciation is not inappropriate.
For almost all of us living in the United States, we live in a land of incomprehensible abundance when it comes to food. We have the luxury of dreaming up gourmet meals and then buying them, whether to cook them ourselves or to have someone else do the heavy work and then serving it to us for a fee.
A simple cup of coffee is not so simple. Coffee is grown in many places except in the continental United States. It must be planted, harvested, graded, shipped, roasted, ground, and then perked, dripped or French pressed. Whether you perform the last few steps at home or delegate the task to the local deli or Starbucks, there is a lot going on in that cup. It took a lot of work.
Our wealth allows us to become, "Foodies", "Gourmets", "Oenophiles". We can cook four different cuisines, serve eight course meals, and discourse intelligently on chablis and chardonnays, cabernets and syrahs.
So as we start the new year, let us take a moment to contemplate our abundance of food and the wealth which makes this all possible. We have the luxury to decide what to eat or what not to eat. We do not have to wonder which dumpster will provide our next meal or which puddle will supply our next drink.
A moment or two of thanks or appreciation is not inappropriate.
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Copenhagen Bar-B-Q or Does the Earth Fry When Environment Talks Fail?
More comments on Copenhagen later, but i found this article of great interest.
The failure in Copenhagen clearly seems to fall into the lap of China. While some might be surprised at this development, I am not. China is too dependent on its environmental suicide-particularly in the form of coal fueled electric plants-as a foundation for its economic power and world leadership, status which its leaders believe to be its manifest destiny in the 21st century.
Chinese leaders have learned well the dictum of Mao Tse Tung, "Talk, Talk. Fight, Fight". Their aim is to sit at negotiating tables without actually accomplishing anything of mutual benefit while simultaneously pursuing their own interests away from negotiations.
It is a hallmark of negotiations with the Chinese that one must be ready sit at the table with them knowing that they are prepared to sit and stall and talk in circles until, to quote Adlai Stevenson, "hell freezes over" or they accomplish all of their goals. Only in regards to the Copenhagen talks, hell won't freeze over. In this case, the earth will have the biggest bar-b-q ever.
The failure in Copenhagen clearly seems to fall into the lap of China. While some might be surprised at this development, I am not. China is too dependent on its environmental suicide-particularly in the form of coal fueled electric plants-as a foundation for its economic power and world leadership, status which its leaders believe to be its manifest destiny in the 21st century.
Chinese leaders have learned well the dictum of Mao Tse Tung, "Talk, Talk. Fight, Fight". Their aim is to sit at negotiating tables without actually accomplishing anything of mutual benefit while simultaneously pursuing their own interests away from negotiations.
It is a hallmark of negotiations with the Chinese that one must be ready sit at the table with them knowing that they are prepared to sit and stall and talk in circles until, to quote Adlai Stevenson, "hell freezes over" or they accomplish all of their goals. Only in regards to the Copenhagen talks, hell won't freeze over. In this case, the earth will have the biggest bar-b-q ever.
Friday, December 25, 2009
Tea Time's Over..
Sometimes you just have to take a break and step back and take things in . Or, to quote that great sage, Yogi Berra, "You can observe a lot by looking". And listening.
It's been almost one year since Barack Obama became president. How is he doing? How are we doing? How is the world doing? In traditional journalism, a synopsis and assessment at the end of a calender year is called a "year-ender". I'll have a lot to say in the coming days as I go through my "year-ender"
A parting note. I welcome any well developed position and I have posted opinions that vary widely from my own. But a note to those people who try to send all sorts of spam through this web site. Notice that none of it gets posted as I moderate all comments and I refuse to post your nonsense. So give it up. You will not succeed.
It's been almost one year since Barack Obama became president. How is he doing? How are we doing? How is the world doing? In traditional journalism, a synopsis and assessment at the end of a calender year is called a "year-ender". I'll have a lot to say in the coming days as I go through my "year-ender"
A parting note. I welcome any well developed position and I have posted opinions that vary widely from my own. But a note to those people who try to send all sorts of spam through this web site. Notice that none of it gets posted as I moderate all comments and I refuse to post your nonsense. So give it up. You will not succeed.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Thanks, Ziporah!
Thanks to reader Ziporah for suggesting that I try a translator site for those messages that I was receiving in Chinese. As you know ,I refused to post those items until I found out what they said. It turned out that they were written in Japanese and they were promoting sex sites. You will not see such promotional material here. Period.
New York, New York 2
Monday- PCU New York enters the harbor
Tuesday- World Series game at Yankee Stadium
Wednesday- New York Yankees defeat the Philadelphia Phillies by a score of 7-3 to win the 2009 World Series
Thursday- (sleep)
Friday- New York Yankees honored with a parade up Broadway, the so-called "Canyon of Heroes", and ceremonies at City Hall
Saturday- Commissioning ceremony of USS New York.
So how are things where you live?
Tuesday- World Series game at Yankee Stadium
Wednesday- New York Yankees defeat the Philadelphia Phillies by a score of 7-3 to win the 2009 World Series
Thursday- (sleep)
Friday- New York Yankees honored with a parade up Broadway, the so-called "Canyon of Heroes", and ceremonies at City Hall
Saturday- Commissioning ceremony of USS New York.
So how are things where you live?
New York, New York
I was on the Hudson River shore this past Monday to welcome what was called PCU New York , and is now USS New York.
Just before the ship arrived at the North Cove area just adjacent to the World Trade Center site a few showers passed through the area. Then the above.
Soon enough, New York appeared:
And there was a brief ceremony as the ship stopped to dip its colors and to fire a 21 gun in salute to the WTC dead.
Today, I attended the commissioning of this ship and I found it to be a very meaningful and emotional event. The remnants of the World Trade Center contained the essence of its inhabitants; their desires, their dreams , their hopes. It was so gratifying, so satisfying, to see the World Trade Center alive in some form. The USS New York is imbued with these spirits, as well as the determination, vigor, pride, and desire of New Yorkers in general. They call USS New York "America's ship". To be truthful, she is New York's ship. We are part of her and she is now part of us.
In her peaceful missions, may the USS New York be welcomed by all and may she serve as a source of aid and healing. When she is sent into harm's way, may our enemies tremble in fear at her presence.
Fair winds and following seas to USS New York and to all who sail on her.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Airlines- What a Joke
Let's talk about airlines. Frankly, I am quite tired of being abused by these consumer hostile entities. I frequently used Northwest and since the merger with Delta have been exposed more and more to the Big D. Northwest was a lot better than Delta! Northwest had better service, better club facilities, older airplanes. On Northwest I did not have to endure ATL torture. Northwest's Memphis hub was quite pleasant.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
The World Keeps Turning
It's good to be back, friends!
Your friendly Radical Moderate needed to take some time off to allow his brain to decompress from the heavy political load during the last year and a half. I fail to see how so many pundits constantly vomit out such drivel on an almost daily basis. I can't do that. And since I have a regular job in addition to this blog, it just makes more sense to take a mini vacation, take the time to think about things, and then jump back into the fray.
First up.. FOOD! The Radical Moderate's spouse, Miss Oklahoma, has decided that she wants to expand her culinary repertoire, so your correspondent has been growing fat on delicious home made pizzas, Indian cuisine , and Moroccan chicken with olives, preserved lemon and pine nuts.
Radical Mod and Miss Oklahoma have taken several short trips, about which I will post more--and pictures-- in another entry.
One most important note-- The Radical Moderate has received two e-mails in CHINESE based on my postings concerning the desire of the government of PRC to use the so-called "Green Dam" to censor the internet to an even greater degree and to stifle internal and external communications between the people of China themsemselves and between the Chinese people and the rest of the world. As Chinese is a language I do not understand, I am waiting to get a translation before posting these comments.
TRM and Miss Oklahoma currently are on Georgia and headed back shortly.
More later!
Your friendly Radical Moderate needed to take some time off to allow his brain to decompress from the heavy political load during the last year and a half. I fail to see how so many pundits constantly vomit out such drivel on an almost daily basis. I can't do that. And since I have a regular job in addition to this blog, it just makes more sense to take a mini vacation, take the time to think about things, and then jump back into the fray.
First up.. FOOD! The Radical Moderate's spouse, Miss Oklahoma, has decided that she wants to expand her culinary repertoire, so your correspondent has been growing fat on delicious home made pizzas, Indian cuisine , and Moroccan chicken with olives, preserved lemon and pine nuts.
Radical Mod and Miss Oklahoma have taken several short trips, about which I will post more--and pictures-- in another entry.
One most important note-- The Radical Moderate has received two e-mails in CHINESE based on my postings concerning the desire of the government of PRC to use the so-called "Green Dam" to censor the internet to an even greater degree and to stifle internal and external communications between the people of China themsemselves and between the Chinese people and the rest of the world. As Chinese is a language I do not understand, I am waiting to get a translation before posting these comments.
TRM and Miss Oklahoma currently are on Georgia and headed back shortly.
More later!
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Di Farra Pizza, Brooklyn, NY- Food Review
Pizziola Dominick DeMarco finishes a DiFarra Pizza
Di Farra pizza, Brooklyn, NY. Tried it today for the first time. Some people say it's the best in the city. It is excellent of its type. Zagat rates it a 27 of 30. Some of the pies came out of the oven nicely charred but mine wasn't . First rate ingredients were used and I loved the fresh basil, Parmesan cheese and olive oil that was added to the pizza after it was baked, making the hot pie exude a delicious aroma.The sauce was excellent with chunks of plum tomato, excellent texture and a wonderful natural balance between tart and sweet. Far too many places use sauce that is overly sweet. Paper thin crust that could have used a few more minutes in the oven to obtain a nice char. As I said previously, some pies were nicely charred mine needed some extra time. Fine quality mozzarella and Parmesan cheeses, oilve oil, and that fresh basil, cut onto the pie with scissors, was excellent!
Di Farra is one of the few places that turns out excellent pizza by the pie or the slice. I'd give Di Farra a 24 out of 30 for food as the pie should have been baked a bit longer, 4 for decor-it's a great hole-in-the wall, and 4 for service. There is none! You come here for the pizza!!!!
To quote Arnold Schwarzenegger in Terminator : I'll be back!
Friday, June 26, 2009
Green Dam- DAMN!
The Chinese governments insistence that Western computer manufactures build in approved censorship software under the guise of protecting the populace from pornography is laughable on several accounts. First, the Chinese people themselves have an incredible history of erotica and to claim that they are trying to keep out immoral material is laughable. Second, everyone knows that it is an attempt but eh government o control everything that is communicated via the internet by and to Chinese citizens.
Totalitarian regimes are like that. Any thought that is contrary to those of the ruling powers is to be stamped out, crushed and eliminated. What is most disturbing is the number of companies that have, to date, been willing to roll over and play lapdog to this brutal regime. I suppose profits uber alles is a near universal concept. Whether it was American companies who did business with the NAZI government, a la IBM, for example among others, or GOOGLE, which currently assists the Chinese government in filtering websites available in that nation ( hey, Sergei, didn't your parents escape from a totalitarian regime?).
As events in Iran show, it may be possible to circumvent government restrictions on access, but only to a degree. What i find beneath contempt is the willing compliance of entities that need to fatten their bottom lines. It sort of reminds me of that line by Nikita Krushchev to the effect that the west will sell the Soviets the rope by which they hang us. I must note that there is some degree of push back by some western entities against supplying the Green Dam censorship software. Good Show!
Another good piece of news is the President's decision to create a Cyber Warfare command to monitor and counter the myriad probes and attacks that the US has been subjected to recently. Who is doing this "probing"? Well, it ain't space aliens looking for some Saturday night fun. Think Al Queada, various criminal elements in lawless regions, Russia, and especially China. We will have to decide whether and when to just monitor, counter probe, or take aggressive actions against those who are seeking out or weak points.
Totalitarian regimes are like that. Any thought that is contrary to those of the ruling powers is to be stamped out, crushed and eliminated. What is most disturbing is the number of companies that have, to date, been willing to roll over and play lapdog to this brutal regime. I suppose profits uber alles is a near universal concept. Whether it was American companies who did business with the NAZI government, a la IBM, for example among others, or GOOGLE, which currently assists the Chinese government in filtering websites available in that nation ( hey, Sergei, didn't your parents escape from a totalitarian regime?).
As events in Iran show, it may be possible to circumvent government restrictions on access, but only to a degree. What i find beneath contempt is the willing compliance of entities that need to fatten their bottom lines. It sort of reminds me of that line by Nikita Krushchev to the effect that the west will sell the Soviets the rope by which they hang us. I must note that there is some degree of push back by some western entities against supplying the Green Dam censorship software. Good Show!
Another good piece of news is the President's decision to create a Cyber Warfare command to monitor and counter the myriad probes and attacks that the US has been subjected to recently. Who is doing this "probing"? Well, it ain't space aliens looking for some Saturday night fun. Think Al Queada, various criminal elements in lawless regions, Russia, and especially China. We will have to decide whether and when to just monitor, counter probe, or take aggressive actions against those who are seeking out or weak points.
The Silence is Deafening
The silence is deafening from the American left regarding Iran. I suppose there is no fun for them if they can't parade behind a banner that says "U.S. OUT OF (fill in the blank)" and burn an American flag. Truly brutal totalitarian regimes seems not to bother them.
Bertrand Russel Is Your Waiter This Evening
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."- Bertrand Russell
Your faithful correspondent is back after a brief respite. It's always a good idea to take some time out to observe before opening ones mouth. I've observed.
Your faithful correspondent is back after a brief respite. It's always a good idea to take some time out to observe before opening ones mouth. I've observed.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Cold Fusion:Power to the People or False Hope?
It's baaack! That dream of clean, cheap, nearly limitless power through the magic of cold fusion.
An engineer friend sent me this clip from a recent edition of the CBS program 60 Minutes that examined what it purported to be recent advances in the development of cold fusion, or, as it is currently being called, a "nuclear event" in a bottle.
I have reasons to call into question many of the elements used in this show. Reporter Scott Pelley says that the Fleischmann/Pons experiments were replicated in laboratories around the world. However, it is not sufficient to say that laboratories have obtained quirky and possibly interesting results from varied experiments. Replication, by definition, means that laboratories around the world have used the exact same apparatus and that they have obtained the exact same results. In the scientific research model, any other use of the term "replication" is not valid.
Furthermore, it is not up to 60 Minutes to give its imprimatur to "cold fusion" by shipping one scientist to a laboratory for two days to inspect their work. Scientific progress is achieved by a much slower and more deliberate process. A laboratory or a researcher publishes work that is subject to peer review. The work is then presented to allow other researchers, irrespective of their location, to use the same materials to arrive at the same, consistent results. Absent these conditions, there is no claim to scientific validity.
It could be, as one of the programs' participants stated, that variances in the quality of palladium used in the experiments varied widely and thus is responsible for the inconsistent results. That hypothesis can easily be tested by supplying researchers with the exact same materials with which to conduct their experiments.
While that work goes on behind laboratory doors, I would advise a lot of starry-eyed futurists whoa re ready to buy the cold-fusion theory to heed the words of the old Frank Sinatra song and "put your dreams away for another day."
An engineer friend sent me this clip from a recent edition of the CBS program 60 Minutes that examined what it purported to be recent advances in the development of cold fusion, or, as it is currently being called, a "nuclear event" in a bottle.
I have reasons to call into question many of the elements used in this show. Reporter Scott Pelley says that the Fleischmann/Pons experiments were replicated in laboratories around the world. However, it is not sufficient to say that laboratories have obtained quirky and possibly interesting results from varied experiments. Replication, by definition, means that laboratories around the world have used the exact same apparatus and that they have obtained the exact same results. In the scientific research model, any other use of the term "replication" is not valid.
Furthermore, it is not up to 60 Minutes to give its imprimatur to "cold fusion" by shipping one scientist to a laboratory for two days to inspect their work. Scientific progress is achieved by a much slower and more deliberate process. A laboratory or a researcher publishes work that is subject to peer review. The work is then presented to allow other researchers, irrespective of their location, to use the same materials to arrive at the same, consistent results. Absent these conditions, there is no claim to scientific validity.
It could be, as one of the programs' participants stated, that variances in the quality of palladium used in the experiments varied widely and thus is responsible for the inconsistent results. That hypothesis can easily be tested by supplying researchers with the exact same materials with which to conduct their experiments.
While that work goes on behind laboratory doors, I would advise a lot of starry-eyed futurists whoa re ready to buy the cold-fusion theory to heed the words of the old Frank Sinatra song and "put your dreams away for another day."
Friday, May 1, 2009
Coming Attractions
OK. I have been away for a bit but it is time to start typing again. Here are some things to look for in the next few days:
FUSION : Is that back?
A SAUDI PRINCE TAP DANCES !
CYBERWAR! COMING TO A COMPUTER NEAR YOU!
And a big "Hello!" to all the intelligence agencies who follow this blog. Sorry to have left you hanging, boys and girls!
FUSION : Is that back?
A SAUDI PRINCE TAP DANCES !
CYBERWAR! COMING TO A COMPUTER NEAR YOU!
And a big "Hello!" to all the intelligence agencies who follow this blog. Sorry to have left you hanging, boys and girls!
Monday, March 30, 2009
Chinese Cyber War
From The Times of London here:
and this:
and this scary paragraph:
Of course, the Chinese take offense at being accused and try to deflect the blame back towards the accuser (a very old interrogation technique, guys!):
What is the proper assessment of these Chinese actions? Are they just performing normal intelligence gathering and probing for weak spots? Are they preparing to aid some entity in a manner which benefits their ultimate goals? Is a cyber cold war underway? What it is not, is an episode from "24".
A spy network believed to have been controlled from China has hacked into classified documents on government and private computers in 103 countries, according to internet researchers. The spy system, dubbed GhostNet, is alleged to have compromised 1,295 machines at Nato and foreign ministries, embassies, banks and news organisations across the world, as well as computers used by the Dalai Lama and Tibetan exiles.
The work of Information Warfare Monitor (IWM) investigators focused initially on allegations of Chinese cyber-espionage against the Tibetan exile community, but led to a much wider network of compromised machines. IWM said that, while China appeared to be the main source of the network, it had not been able conclusively to identify the hackers. The IWM is composed of researchers from an Ottawa-based think-tank, SecDev Group, and the Munk Centre for International Studies at the University of Toronto.
They found that the foreign ministries of Iran, Bangladesh, Latvia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Brunei, Barbados and Bhutan had been spied on remotely, and the embassies of India, South Korea, Indonesia, Romania, Cyprus, Malta, Thailand, Taiwan, Portugal, Germany and Pakistan hacked.
and this:
The IWM report said: “GhostNet represents a network of compromised computers in high-value political, economic and media locations in numerous countries worldwide. These organisations are almost certainly oblivious to the compromised situation in which they find themselves. The computers of diplomats, military attachés, private assistants, secretaries to prime ministers, journalists and others are under the concealed control of unknown assailant(s).
“In Dharamsala [the headquarters of the Tibetan government in exile] and elsewhere, we have witnessed machines being profiled and sensitive documents being removed. Almost certainly, documents are being removed without the targets’ knowledge, key-strokes logged, web cameras are being silently triggered and audio inputs surreptitiously activated.”
Chinese hackers are thought to have targeted Western networks repeatedly. Computers at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and other Whitehall departments were attacked from China in 2007. In the same year, Jonathan Evans, the MI5 Director-General, alerted 300 British businesses that they were under Chinese cyber-attack.
and this scary paragraph:
British intelligence chiefs have warned recently that China may have gained the capability effectively to shut down Britain by crippling its telecoms and utilities. Equipment installed by Huawei, the Chinese telecoms giant, in BT’s new communications network could be used to halt critical services such as power, food and water supplies, they said.
Of course, the Chinese take offense at being accused and try to deflect the blame back towards the accuser (a very old interrogation technique, guys!):
The Chinese Embassy in London said that there was no evidence to back up the claim that the Chinese Government was behind GhostNet and alleged that the report had been “commissioned by the Tibetan government in exile”.
Liu Weimin, a spokesman, said: “I will not be surprised if this report is just another case of their recent media and propaganda campaign. In China, it is against the law to hack into the computers of others, and we are victims of such cyber-attack. It is a global challenge that requires global cooperation. China is an active participant in such cooperation in the world.”
What is the proper assessment of these Chinese actions? Are they just performing normal intelligence gathering and probing for weak spots? Are they preparing to aid some entity in a manner which benefits their ultimate goals? Is a cyber cold war underway? What it is not, is an episode from "24".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
